PRAFULLA MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the Court.--Heard counsel for the petitioner as well as the State counsel on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) Counter-affidavit is on record and the petition is listed for 'Admission': As agreed between the respective counsels, the writ petition is heard finally.

(3.) The instant writ petition is preferred challenging the order of termination dated i 1.7.2009 and 23.7.2009 respectively, which has already been stayed by this Court, by which services of the petitioner stands terminated. The second prayer is claiming regularisation on the post for which he was appointed after the termination order is quashed. The assertion on behalf of the petitioner is that similar benefits have been granted in other cases by this Court as well as by the Apex Court.